Construction of personalized learning pathways through mixed methods

Salinas-Ibáñez, Jesús and De-Benito, Bárbara Construction of personalized learning pathways through mixed methods. Comunicar, 2020, vol. 28, n. 65, pp. 31-42. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img]
Preview
 Text (Research article (English))
c6503en.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (1MB) | Preview
[img]
Preview
 Text (Research article (Español))
c6503es.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (1MB) | Preview

English abstract

This paper deals with the implementation of personal learning pathways in a technology-enriched environment to enhance learning experiences in initial teacher training. The study uses mixed-methods within a design-based research approach. In a first phase of the approach, the characteristics that personalised learning pathways should meet were identified. In the next stage, the learning sequences’ structure for the pathways was designed, considering context, teaching-learning approach, tasks and assessment. The main result is an interchangeable learning sequence structure prototype that enables the configuration of personalised learning pathways by the students themselves, and the exchange and co-design of learning pathways between different teachers. The students select the sequences from a catalogue, organising their own learning pathways from the combination of different types of sequences offered. This strategy promotes students’ autonomy and self-direction in the learning process, as well as their development of personal information management and collaborative work skills. The conclusion is that the proposed personalized pathways present an adequate balance between the structure, result of the learning design and / or co-design, and the necessary autonomy for the self-direction of their own learning process, whether in individual learning or in the collaborative construction of knowledge.

Spanish abstract

Este trabajo se ocupa de la aplicación de itinerarios personales de aprendizaje en un ambiente enriquecido por tecnología para la mejora de las experiencias de aprendizaje en la formación inicial docente. Se utiliza un enfoque mixto aplicando investigación basada en diseño, para identificar las características que deben reunir los itinerarios personalizados de aprendizaje y diseñar la estructura de secuencias didácticas que configuran dichos itinerarios atendiendo al contexto, al enfoque de enseñanza y aprendizaje, a las tareas y a la evaluación. El principal resultado es un prototipo de estructura intercambiable de secuencia didáctica que permite la configuración de itinerarios personalizados de aprendizaje por parte de los propios estudiantes, al mismo tiempo que el intercambio y co-diseño de itinerarios entre distintos docentes. Los estudiantes seleccionan las secuencias de entre un catálogo de ellas, organizando sus propios itinerarios de aprendizaje a partir de la combinación de diferentes tipos de secuencias ofertadas, promoviendo la autonomía y autodirección del proceso de aprendizaje y el desarrollo de competencias de gestión personal de la información y de trabajo colaborativo por parte de los alumnos. Se concluye que los itinerarios personalizados propuestos presentan un adecuado equilibrio entre la estructura, fruto de la labor de diseño y/o co-diseño didáctico, y la autonomía necesaria para la autodirección del propio proceso de aprendizaje, ya sea en aprendizajes individuales o en la construcción colaborativa del conocimiento.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Learning sequences; curricular design; learning pathways; personalised learning environment; didactic strategies; self-regulated learning; design-based research; digital; Secuencias de aprendizaje; diseño curricular; itinerario de aprendizaje; entorno personal de aprendizaje; estrategias didácticas; aprendizaje autorregulado; investigación basada en diseño; digital
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BJ. Communication
G. Industry, profession and education.
G. Industry, profession and education. > GH. Education.
Depositing user: Alex Ruiz
Date deposited: 09 Jan 2021 06:43
Last modified: 09 Jan 2021 06:43
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/40891

References

Adams-Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall-Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. The New Media Consortium. https://bit.ly/2Wcd3md

Alghamdi, A.H., & Li, L. (2013). Adapting design-based research as a research methodology in educational Settings. International Journal of Education and Research, 1(10), 1-12. https://bit.ly/3b4q5q3

Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x11428813

Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.D., & Hanesian, H. (1983). Psicología educativa: Un punto de vista cognitivo. Trillas.

Cabero, J. (2013). El aprendizaje autorregulado como marco teórico para la aplicación educativa de las comunidades virtuales y los entornos personales de aprendizaje. Revista Teoría de la Educación, 14(2), 133-156. https://bit.ly/2We04AK

Cañas, A.J., & Novak, J. (2010). Itineraries: Capturing instructors experience using concept maps as learning object organizers. In J. Sanchez, A.J. Cañas, & J. Novak (Eds.), Concept maps: Making learning meaningful. Universidad de Chile. https://bit.ly/2LL8f1h

Castañeda, L., & Adell, J. (2013). Entornos personales de aprendizaje: Claves para el ecosistema educativo en red. Marfil. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v2i1.2856

Castañeda, S., Peñalosa, E., & Austria, F. (2014). Efectos de perfiles agentivos y no agentivos sobre la formación teórica del psicólogo. Componentes de epistemología personal, cognitivos y autorregulatorios. Facultad de Psicología UNAM / CONACyT.

Christ, T.W. (2010). Teaching mixed methods and action research: Pedagogical, practical, and evaluative considerations. In Tashakkori, A., & Teddie, C. (Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n25

Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8517-0

Conole, G., & Oliver, M. (2007). Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: themes, methods and impact on practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203966266

Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage. https://bit.ly/3cQFWdB

Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage. https://bit.ly/2Tk0nYP

Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.

Dabbagh, N., & English, M. (2015). Using student self-ratings to assess the alignment of instructional design competencies and courses in a graduate program. Techtrends, 59(4), 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0868-4

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). The role of social media in self-regulated learning. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 9(2), 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijwbc.2013.053248

De-Benito, B., Mesquida, A.D., & Salinas, J.M. (2012). Los itinerarios de aprendizaje mediante mapas conceptuales como recurso para la representación del conocimiento. Edutec, 39, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2012.39.372

De-Benito, B., Villatoro, S., & Salinas, J., (2020). Propuesta de itinerarios personalizados de aprendizaje en la formación inicial docente. In C. Lindi?n, M.B. Esteban, J.C.F. Bergmann, N. Castell, & P. Rivera-Vargas (Eds.), Llibre d’actes de la I Conferència Internacional de Recerca en Educació. Educació 2019: Reptes, tendències i compromisos. LiberLibro.

Delfino, M., & Persico, D. (2007). Self-regulated Learning in Technology Enhanced Learning Environments – a European review. In R. Carneiro, P. Lefrere, & K. Steffens. (Eds), Kaleidoscope Seed Project. https://bit.ly/2xLsYPc

Design-based Research Collective (Ed.) (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032001005

Díaz-Barriga, A. (1997). Didáctica y curriculum. Convergencias en los programas de estudio. Paidós.

Easterday, M., Lewis, D., & Gerber, E. (2014). Design-based research process: Problems, phases and applications. ICLS Proceedings Vol. I (pp. 317–324). https://bit.ly/3fwrQjk

Goodyear, P., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2013). In medias res: Reframing design for learning. Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.19909

Gros, B., & Noguera, I. (2013). Mirando el futuro: Evolución de las tendencias tecnopedagógicas en Educación Superior. Campus Virtuales, 2(2), 130-140. https://bit.ly/2LdNtH7

Hernández-Leo, D., Asensio-Pérez, J.I., Derntl, M., Pozzi, F., Chacon-Perez, J., Prieto, L.P., & Persico, D. (2018). An integrated environment for learning design. Frontiers in ICT, 5(9). https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2018.00009

Jääskelä, P., Heilala, V., Kärkkäinen, T., & Häkkinen, P. (2020). Student agency analytics: learning analytics as a tool for analysing student agency in higher education. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1725130

Jääskelä, P., Poikkeus, A., Vasalampi, K., Valleala, U.M., & Rasku-Puttonen. H. (2017). Assessing agency of university students: validation of the AUS Scale. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2061-2079. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130693

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083

Llorente, M.C. (2013). Aprendizaje autorregulado y PLE. Edmetic, 2(1), 58-75. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v2i1.2861

Marcelo, C., Yot, C., Murillo, P., & Mayor, C. (2016). Actividades de aprendizaje con tecnologías en la universidad. ¿Qué uso hacen los profesores? Profesorado, 20(3), 283-312. https://bit.ly/2yvtFwm

Marín-Juarros, V., Negre-Bennasar, F., & Pérez-Garcias, A. (2014). Construction of the foundations of the PLE and PLN for collaborative learning. [Entornos y redes personales de aprendizaje (PLE-PLN) para el aprendizaje colaborativo]. Comunicar, 42, 35-43. https://doi.org/10.3916/C42-2014-03

McKenney, S.E., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research. Routledge. https://bit.ly/2LHAQEK

Miranda, E. (2017). Documentless assessments using nominal group interviews, Software Quality Professional, 19(2), 50-61. https://bit.ly/35zs3h8

Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge. Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Lawrence Erlbaum As. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601629

Prats, E. (2016). Herramientas para la evaluación de mapas conceptuales: una primera aproximación. Edutec. Revista electrónica de Tecnología educativa, 56, 74-88. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2016.56.738

Prendes, M.P., Solano, I.M., Serrano, J.L., Gonzalez-Calatayud, V., & Roman, M.M. (2018). Entornos Personales de Aprendizaje para la comprensión y desarrollo de la competencia digital: Análisis de los estudiantes universitarios en España. Educatio Siglo XXI, 3(2), 115-134. https://doi.org/10.6018/j/333081

Reeves, T.C. (2006). Design research from the technology perspective. In J. van-den-Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Ed.), Educational design research (pp. 86-109). Routledge.

Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. 2 (pp. 425–453). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Richey, R., & Klein, J. (2014). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203826034

Sharples, M., de-Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi, C.K., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M., & Wong, L.H. (2016). Innovating Pedagogy 2016: Open University Innovation Report 5. The Open University. https://bit.ly/2xGDozs

Taba, H. (1974). Elaboración del curriculum. Ed. Troquel.

Teddie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2010). Overview of contemporary issues in mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddie (Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 1-41). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n1

Tobón, S., Pimienta, J., & García, J. (2010). Secuencias Didácticas: Aprendizaje y evaluación de competencias. Pearson-Prentice Hall. https://bit.ly/2LHK5Vk

Tur, G., Marín, V.I., Moreno, J., Gallardo, A., & Urbina, S. (2016). From diagrams to self-regulated learning: student teachers’ reflections on the construction of their PLE. Educational Media International, 53(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2016.1211335

Varga-Atkins, T., McIsaac, J., & Willis, I. (2017). Focus Group meets Nominal Group Technique: An effective combination for student evaluation? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(4), 289-300, https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1058721

Wang, F., & Hannafin, M.J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504682

Zheng, L. (2015). A systematic literature review of design-based research from 2004 to 2013. Journal of Computer Education, 2(4), 399-420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0036-z


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS